The survey of UK HR professionals found that nearly nine in ten organisations (87 per cent) have seen an increase in grievances written with AI assistance in the past year. Of those receiving them, 92 per cent report overly complex or exaggerated submissions, 83 per cent longer complaints and 82 per cent unrealistic expectations about outcomes.
Most common types of grievances being raised:
- Relationship with manager (67 per cent)
- Bullying or harassment (52 per cent)
- Relationship with a colleague (49 per cent)
The findings suggest AI is accelerating a broader shift in how workplace concerns are written, managed and escalated. In the last two years, 71 per cent of organisations have experienced an increase in the number of grievances received, alongside marked changes in their form and complexity:
- 88 per cent of organisations have seen an increase in the use of formal or legal language in grievances
- 82 per cent have seen an increase in the level of detail included in formal complaints, while 81 per cent say more issues are now being raised within a single grievance
- Nearly three-quarters (73 per cent) report that the issues being raised have become more complex, while 71 per cent say grievances are taking longer to resolve
Together, these trends are creating a significant administrative burden for HR teams and making it harder to isolate the underlying concern. More detail and legal language do not necessarily bring greater clarity: one in three HR professionals (33 per cent) say the clarity of grievances has decreased over the past two years.
“The desire to use AI to draft grievances is completely understandable,” says Sheila Attwood, Senior Content Manager at Brightmine. “It gives employees an opportunity to consolidate their experiences and concerns, reference legal frameworks they believe have been breached and present their complaint more formally, often in the belief that this adds authority and credibility.
“The challenge for employers is that AI can also introduce unnecessary legal complexity and create unrealistic expectations about outcomes and timeframes.
“What is clear from the research is how quickly the gap between employee adoption and workplace policy has developed,” she adds. “Employers should not look to ban AI from the process, but they do need to provide clearer guidance on its appropriate use, while keeping the underlying workplace concern at the centre of grievance conversations.”
Most organisations have yet to respond formally to this shift: 94 per cent do not currently have guidelines or expectations in place governing the appropriate use of AI when submitting a grievance. The policy gap is compounded by limited capacity for early resolution. Although 66 per cent of HR professionals say employees tend to raise formal grievances rather than address concerns informally first, just 36 per cent believe line managers have the skills required to handle grievances informally. Only 11 per cent believe recent technological changes have had a positive overall impact on the grievance process.
With AI-assisted complaints becoming more common, employers need to update grievance policies, equip managers to resolve concerns early and set clear expectations for appropriate AI use – before more issues are drawn unnecessarily into lengthy formal processes.
